Oil pipeline draws passionate debate

A proposed oil pipeline was touted as a safer way to transport crude oil and criticized as a threat to the environment Friday at a public hearing in St. Cloud.

Roughly 200 people attended the hearing at River's Edge Convention Center. It was the last stop in a week of hearings on the Sandpiper project, a $2.6 billion pipeline Enbridge Energy wants to build to deliver light crude from the Bakken fields of North Dakota.

Enbridge's preferred 616-mile route goes from Beaver Lodge, North Dakota, to Clearbrook and across northern Minnesota to Superior, Wisconsin. Several alternative routes are also being considered, including one that cuts through the St. Cloud area.

For several hours, supporters and opponents of the project took turns testifying before Administrative Law Judge Eric Lipman, who will recommend to the state Public Utilities Commission whether to grant a certificate of need for the pipeline.

Supporters of the project argued that the pipeline is critically needed to transport crude oil more safely than rail or truck.

State Rep. Dale Lueck, R-Aitkin, said there's a "pressing need" to increase the amount of oil moved by pipeline instead of by rail, which he said is responsible for far more fatalities.

"This is not about anything more simple than we need to put crude oil in pipelines in the interest of public safety," Lueck said.

Several union members testified in favor of the project, saying it would create much-needed well-paying jobs.

Scott Erlander, a member of the Pipefitters Local Union 455 of St. Paul, said pipe workers care about safety and water quality too.

"No one here wants to see our water contaminated including all the workers on this project … This is not trading water for oil," Erlander said.

Teresa Bohnen, president of the St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce, said the Sandpiper would provide "real benefit" to Minnesota, including the creation of about 1,500 construction jobs.

Bohnen noted that the increased amount of oil rail traffic is interfering with the state's commerce and movement of goods, including agricultural products and coal for the Sherco plant in Becker.

But opponents argued that the pipeline will worsen the problem of climate change by continuing reliance on fossil fuels, instead of developing renewable energy.

"It's a not a matter of how safe that pipeline is, better than trains," said Dave Carroll. "We're looking at the survivability of all civilization."

Opponents voiced concern about the risk of a pipeline break in some of the state's most sensitive water resources. They pointed to Enbridge's history of accidents, including a 2010 incident in Michigan that spilled more than 800,000 gallons into the Kalamazoo River.

Bob Edelbrock of St. Cloud said he's concerned about how Enbridge would access the pipeline in rural areas in case of a problem.

"I really fear … that there is a risk that I'm not too sure I want to take for my grandchildren," said Edelbrock, who owns property in Cass County close to the Sandpiper route.

The judge is expected to issue a report in April with a recommendation to the Public Utilities Commission. If the commission grants a certificate of need, the next phase would be determining a route.

If a route permit is approved, construction would take place in 2016, and the pipeline would be in service in 2017.

Follow Kirsti Marohn on Twitter @kirstimarohn or reach her by phone at 255-8746.